District of Colorado • 1:26-cv-01865

Hann v. Baltazar

Active

Case Information

Filed: April 30, 2026
Assigned to: Susan Prose
Referred to:
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause: 28:2241in - Habeas Corpus: INS
Active
Last Activity: May 20, 2026
Parties: View All Parties →

Docket Entries

#1
Apr 30, 2026
APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 USC 2241 (Filing fee $ 5, Receipt Number ACODC-10984181)Attorney Sarah L. Vuong added to party Moussa Hann(pty:pet), filed by Moussa Hann. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Vuong, Sarah) (Entered: 04/30/2026)
Main Document: APPLICATION
#2
Apr 30, 2026
Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Susan Prose. Text Only Entry. (dhern, ) (Entered: 05/04/2026)
#3
May 04, 2026
Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 40.1, direct assignment of civil actions to full time magistrate judges. (dhern, ) (Entered: 05/04/2026)
Main Document: Magistrate
#4
May 07, 2026
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Susan Prose on May 7, 2026. Upon review of Petitioner's Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1), which requests, inter alia, that the Court assume jurisdiction, declare that Petitioner's detention violates the Due Process Clause and 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b)(2) and 1226(a), issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering Petitioners immediate release (or alternatively order a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven days with the burden of proof on Respondents), enjoin transfer out of the District, and preclude invocation of the automatic stay, it is ORDERED that Petitioner shall serve Respondents with a copy of the Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1), and accompanying papers, along with a copy of this Order, by e-mail and overnight mail, on or before May 9, 2026. Petitioner shall promptly file proof of such service on the docket, and counsel for Respondents shall promptly enter their notices of appearance. Within seven days of service, Respondents shall RESPOND to the Application and SHOW CAUSE why it should not be granted. In doing so, Respondents are asked to briefly address whether the issues presented here are materially different from the issues this Court has resolved in its prior rulings in Merchan-Pacheo v. Noem, No. 25-cv-3860-SBP, 2026 WL 88526 (D. Colo. Jan. 12, 2026) and/or Arenas v. Noem, No. 26-cv-24-SBP, 2026 WL 317562 (D. Colo. Feb. 5, 2026). Respondents are also asked to briefly address whether Petitioner has failed to administratively exhaust the claims asserted in the Application. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file a completed Magistrate Judge consent form (ECF No. 3) no less than seven days from the date of this Order. Respondents are hereby ENJOINED from transferring Petitioner outside of the jurisdiction of the District of Colorado pending resolution of the Application. Text Only Entry (sbplc9, ) (Entered: 05/07/2026)
May 07, 2026
Order
#5
May 11, 2026
NOTICE of Service by Petitioner Moussa Hann (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Vuong, Sarah) (Entered: 05/11/2026)
Main Document: NOTICE
#6
May 12, 2026
NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Winnie Wu on behalf of Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George ValdezAttorney Winnie Wu added to party Juan Baltazar(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party Todd Blanche(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party Markwayne Mullin(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party George Valdez(pty:res) (Wu, Winnie) (Entered: 05/12/2026)
Main Document: NOTICE
#7
May 14, 2026
CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Petitioner Moussa Hann All parties consent.. (Vuong, Sarah) (Entered: 05/14/2026)
Main Document: CONSENT
#8
May 15, 2026
ANSWER to Complaint by Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George Valdez.(Wu, Winnie) (Entered: 05/15/2026)
Main Document: ANSWER
#9
May 18, 2026
ORDER OF REFERENCE. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, Local Civil Rules 40.1(c)(6) and 72.2, and 7 Election Concerning Consent/Non-Consent to United States Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, this action is REFERRED for final disposition to Magistrate Judge Susan Prose, who will conduct any and all further proceedings and order the entry of judgment in the case. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 05/18/2026. Text Only Entry. (agryan) (Entered: 05/18/2026)
May 18, 2026
Order on Consent to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge
#10
May 19, 2026
REPLY to 1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 8 Answer to Complaint by Petitioner Moussa Hann. (Vuong, Sarah) (Entered: 05/19/2026)
Main Document: REPLY
#11
May 20, 2026
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Susan Prose on May 20, 2026. The 1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus (the "Petition") is GRANTED in part. The Court notes that Respondents concede that the central legal issue presented here -- whether Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) or is instead entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) -- is not materially different from the issue this Court resolved in Merchan-Pacheo v. Noem, No. 25-cv-3860-SBP, 2026 WL 88526 (D. Colo. Jan. 12, 2026), and Arenas v. Noem, No. 26-cv-24-SBP, 2026 WL 317562 (D. Colo. Feb. 5, 2026). Respondents acknowledge that this Courts prior rulings would lead the Court to reach the same result here if the Court adheres to those decisions. The Court therefore refers the parties to its analyses in Merchan-Pacheo and Arenas, which apply with equal force here. Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). It is ORDERED that Respondents shall provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) no later than seven (7) days from the date of this Order (i.e., by May 27, 2026). Respondents shall file a status report confirming that the bond hearing has been conducted no later than ten (10) days from the date of this Order (i.e., by May 30, 2026). If Petitioner has not received the bond hearing by the time the status report is due, Petitioner shall be immediately released from custody under appropriate conditions of supervision. The Court declines to reach Petitioner's additional arguments (including immediate release and preclusion of the automatic stay) because the statutory claim resolved above is dispositive.Text Only Entry (sbplc9, ) (Entered: 05/20/2026)
May 20, 2026
Order